1984 essay about power

Doublethink Is Stronger Than Orwell Imagined

What 1984 means today

No novel of the past century has had more influence than George Orwell’s 1984 . The title, the adjectival form of the author’s last name, the vocabulary of the all-powerful Party that rules the superstate Oceania with the ideology of Ingsoc— doublethink , memory hole , unperson , thoughtcrime , Newspeak , Thought Police , Room 101 , Big Brother —they’ve all entered the English language as instantly recognizable signs of a nightmare future. It’s almost impossible to talk about propaganda, surveillance, authoritarian politics, or perversions of truth without dropping a reference to 1984. Throughout the Cold War, the novel found avid underground readers behind the Iron Curtain who wondered, How did he know?

It was also assigned reading for several generations of American high-school students. I first encountered 1984 in 10th-grade English class. Orwell’s novel was paired with Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World , whose hedonistic and pharmaceutical dystopia seemed more relevant to a California teenager in the 1970s than did the bleak sadism of Oceania. I was too young and historically ignorant to understand where 1984 came from and exactly what it was warning against. Neither the book nor its author stuck with me. In my 20s, I discovered Orwell’s essays and nonfiction books and reread them so many times that my copies started to disintegrate, but I didn’t go back to 1984 . Since high school, I’d lived through another decade of the 20th century, including the calendar year of the title, and I assumed I already “knew” the book. It was too familiar to revisit.

Read: Teaching ‘1984’ in 2016

So when I recently read the novel again, I wasn’t prepared for its power. You have to clear away what you think you know, all the terminology and iconography and cultural spin-offs, to grasp the original genius and lasting greatness of 1984 . It is both a profound political essay and a shocking, heartbreaking work of art. And in the Trump era , it’s a best seller .

The Ministry of Truth: The Biography of George Orwell’s 1984 , by the British music critic Dorian Lynskey, makes a rich and compelling case for the novel as the summation of Orwell’s entire body of work and a master key to understanding the modern world. The book was published in 1949, when Orwell was dying of tuberculosis , but Lynskey dates its biographical sources back more than a decade to Orwell’s months in Spain as a volunteer on the republican side of the country’s civil war. His introduction to totalitarianism came in Barcelona, when agents of the Soviet Union created an elaborate lie to discredit Trotskyists in the Spanish government as fascist spies.

Left-wing journalists readily accepted the fabrication, useful as it was to the cause of communism. Orwell didn’t, exposing the lie with eyewitness testimony in journalism that preceded his classic book Homage to Catalonia —and that made him a heretic on the left. He was stoical about the boredom and discomforts of trench warfare—he was shot in the neck and barely escaped Spain with his life—but he took the erasure of truth hard. It threatened his sense of what makes us sane, and life worth living. “History stopped in 1936,” he later told his friend Arthur Koestler, who knew exactly what Orwell meant. After Spain, just about everything he wrote and read led to the creation of his final masterpiece. “History stopped,” Lynskey writes, “and Nineteen Eighty-Four began.”

The biographical story of 1984 —the dying man’s race against time to finish his novel in a remote cottage on the Isle of Jura , off Scotland—will be familiar to many Orwell readers. One of Lynskey’s contributions is to destroy the notion that its terrifying vision can be attributed to, and in some way disregarded as, the death wish of a tuberculosis patient. In fact, terminal illness roused in Orwell a rage to live—he got remarried on his deathbed—just as the novel’s pessimism is relieved, until its last pages, by Winston Smith’s attachment to nature, antique objects, the smell of coffee, the sound of a proletarian woman singing, and above all his lover, Julia. 1984 is crushingly grim, but its clarity and rigor are stimulants to consciousness and resistance. According to Lynskey, “Nothing in Orwell’s life and work supports a diagnosis of despair.”

Lynskey traces the literary genesis of 1984 to the utopian fictions of the optimistic 19th century—Edward Bellamy’s Looking Backward (1888); the sci-fi novels of H. G. Wells, which Orwell read as a boy—and their dystopian successors in the 20th, including the Russian Yevgeny Zamyatin’s We (1924) and Huxley’s Brave New World (1932). The most interesting pages in The Ministry of Truth are Lynskey’s account of the novel’s afterlife. The struggle to claim 1984 began immediately upon publication, with a battle over its political meaning. Conservative American reviewers concluded that Orwell’s main target wasn’t just the Soviet Union but the left generally. Orwell, fading fast, waded in with a statement explaining that the novel was not an attack on any particular government but a satire of the totalitarian tendencies in Western society and intellectuals: “The moral to be drawn from this dangerous nightmare situation is a simple one: Don’t let it happen. It depends on you .” But every work of art escapes the artist’s control—the more popular and complex, the greater the misunderstandings.

Lynskey’s account of the reach of 1984 is revelatory. The novel has inspired movies, television shows, plays, a ballet, an opera, a David Bowie album , imitations, parodies, sequels, rebuttals, Lee Harvey Oswald, the Black Panther Party, and the John Birch Society. It has acquired something of the smothering ubiquity of Big Brother himself: 1984 is watching you. With the arrival of the year 1984, the cultural appropriations rose to a deafening level. That January an ad for the Apple Macintosh was watched by 96 million people during the Super Bowl and became a marketing legend. The Mac, represented by a female athlete, hurls a sledgehammer at a giant telescreen and explodes the shouting face of a man—oppressive technology—to the astonishment of a crowd of gray zombies. The message: “You’ll see why 1984 won’t be like ‘1984.’ ”

The argument recurs every decade or so: Orwell got it wrong. Things haven’t turned out that bad. The Soviet Union is history. Technology is liberating. But Orwell never intended his novel to be a prediction, only a warning. And it’s as a warning that 1984 keeps finding new relevance. The week of Donald Trump’s inauguration, when the president’s adviser Kellyanne Conway justified his false crowd estimate by using the phrase alternative facts , the novel returned to the best-seller lists. A theatrical adaptation was rushed to Broadway. The vocabulary of Newspeak went viral. An authoritarian president who stood the term fake news on its head, who once said, “What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening,” has given 1984 a whole new life.

What does the novel mean for us? Not Room 101 in the Ministry of Love, where Winston is interrogated and tortured until he loses everything he holds dear. We don’t live under anything like a totalitarian system. “By definition, a country in which you are free to read Nineteen Eighty-Four is not the country described in Nineteen Eighty-Four ,” Lynskey acknowledges. Instead, we pass our days under the nonstop surveillance of a telescreen that we bought at the Apple Store, carry with us everywhere, and tell everything to, without any coercion by the state. The Ministry of Truth is Facebook, Google, and cable news. We have met Big Brother and he is us.

Trump’s election brought a rush of cautionary books with titles like On Tyranny , Fascism: A Warning , and How Fascism Works . My local bookstore set up a totalitarian-themed table and placed the new books alongside 1984 . They pointed back to the 20th century—if it happened in Germany, it could happen here—and warned readers how easily democracies collapse. They were alarm bells against complacency and fatalism—“ the politics of inevitability ,” in the words of the historian Timothy Snyder, “a sense that the future is just more of the present, that the laws of progress are known, that there are no alternatives, and therefore nothing really to be done.” The warnings were justified, but their emphasis on the mechanisms of earlier dictatorships drew attention away from the heart of the malignancy—not the state, but the individual. The crucial issue was not that Trump might abolish democracy but that Americans had put him in a position to try. Unfreedom today is voluntary. It comes from the bottom up.

We are living with a new kind of regime that didn’t exist in Orwell’s time. It combines hard nationalism—the diversion of frustration and cynicism into xenophobia and hatred—with soft distraction and confusion: a blend of Orwell and Huxley, cruelty and entertainment. The state of mind that the Party enforces through terror in 1984 , where truth becomes so unstable that it ceases to exist, we now induce in ourselves. Totalitarian propaganda unifies control over all information, until reality is what the Party says it is—the goal of Newspeak is to impoverish language so that politically incorrect thoughts are no longer possible. Today the problem is too much information from too many sources, with a resulting plague of fragmentation and division—not excessive authority but its disappearance, which leaves ordinary people to work out the facts for themselves, at the mercy of their own prejudices and delusions.

During the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, propagandists at a Russian troll farm used social media to disseminate a meme: “ ‘The People Will Believe What the Media Tells Them They Believe.’  — George Orwell.” But Orwell never said this. The moral authority of his name was stolen and turned into a lie toward that most Orwellian end: the destruction of belief in truth. The Russians needed partners in this effort and found them by the millions, especially among America’s non-elites. In 1984 , working-class people are called “proles,” and Winston believes they’re the only hope for the future. As Lynskey points out, Orwell didn’t foresee “that the common man and woman would embrace doublethink as enthusiastically as the intellectuals and, without the need for terror or torture, would choose to believe that two plus two was whatever they wanted it to be.”

We stagger under the daily load of doublethink pouring from Trump, his enablers in the Inner Party, his mouthpieces in the Ministry of Truth, and his fanatical supporters among the proles. Spotting doublethink in ourselves is much harder. “To see what is in front of one’s nose needs a constant struggle,” Orwell wrote . In front of my nose, in the world of enlightened and progressive people where I live and work, a different sort of doublethink has become pervasive. It’s not the claim that true is fake or that two plus two makes five. Progressive doublethink—which has grown worse in reaction to the right-wing kind—creates a more insidious unreality because it operates in the name of all that is good. Its key word is justice —a word no one should want to live without. But today the demand for justice forces you to accept contradictions that are the essence of doublethink.

For example, many on the left now share an unacknowledged but common assumption that a good work of art is made of good politics and that good politics is a matter of identity. The progressive view of a book or play depends on its political stance, and its stance—even its subject matter—is scrutinized in light of the group affiliation of the artist: Personal identity plus political position equals aesthetic value. This confusion of categories guides judgments all across the worlds of media, the arts, and education, from movie reviews to grant committees. Some people who register the assumption as doublethink might be privately troubled, but they don’t say so publicly. Then self-censorship turns into self-deception, until the recognition itself disappears—a lie you accept becomes a lie you forget. In this way, intelligent people do the work of eliminating their own unorthodoxy without the Thought Police.

Recommended Reading

A lost scottish island, george orwell, and the future of maps.

David Simon and E.L. Doctorow on 'the Potential for the Orwellian Nightmare'

Dear Therapist: My Boyfriend Wants Me to Destroy My Precious Scrapbook From My First Marriage

Orthodoxy is also enforced by social pressure, nowhere more intensely than on Twitter, where the specter of being shamed or “canceled” produces conformity as much as the prospect of adding to your tribe of followers does. This pressure can be more powerful than a party or state, because it speaks in the name of the people and in the language of moral outrage, against which there is, in a way, no defense. Certain commissars with large followings patrol the precincts of social media and punish thought criminals, but most progressives assent without difficulty to the stifling consensus of the moment and the intolerance it breeds—not out of fear, but because they want to be counted on the side of justice.

This willing constriction of intellectual freedom will do lasting damage. It corrupts the ability to think clearly, and it undermines both culture and progress. Good art doesn’t come from wokeness, and social problems starved of debate can’t find real solutions. “Nothing is gained by teaching a parrot a new word,” Orwell wrote in 1946. “What is needed is the right to print what one believes to be true, without having to fear bullying or blackmail from any side.” Not much has changed since the 1940s. The will to power still passes through hatred on the right and virtue on the left.

1984 will always be an essential book, regardless of changes in ideologies, for its portrayal of one person struggling to hold on to what is real and valuable. “Sanity is not statistical,” Winston thinks one night as he slips off to sleep. Truth, it turns out, is the most fragile thing in the world. The central drama of politics is the one inside your skull.

This article appears in the July 2019 print edition with the headline “George Orwell’s Unheeded Warning.”

​When you buy a book using a link on this page, we receive a commission. Thank you for supporting The Atlantic.

About the Author

More Stories

What Democrats Can Learn From the Trauma of 1968

What Will Become of American Civilization?

Kenia Sedler

My literary journey in classical self-education.

Orwell’s 1984: On the Power of Words to Affect Thought

• Science Fiction

1984  is book #269 from The Literary Project .

I recently re-read George Orwell’s classic dystopian novel 1984 . It had been at least 15 years since I had read it the first time, and so I remembered little. In diving in again, I was struck by Orwell’s masterful ability to demonstrate the power of words and their importance to a liberal state–for a democratic society and individual freedom. It is a power that, I believe, most of us–myself included–tend to seriously underestimate.

To drive this concept home, Orwell invented a fictional language: Newspeak. It is the official language of Oceania, the totalitarian state within which 1984 takes place. It is a highly abbreviated version of Standard English, a language built chiefly by eliminating words so that what is left is only the ability to express permissible–or, “Orthodox”–ideas. Words that can be used to express unorthodox thought are completely stripped from the language, so that expression–and even thought–that is against the Party’s principles is impossible.

Winston Smith is our protagonist, and towards the beginning of the novel his “comrade” Syme sits down with him at lunch and discusses his work: he is on an enormous team of experts compiling the Eleventh Edition of the Newspeak dictionary.

Syme explains:

“You think, I dare say, that our chief job is inventing new words. But not a bit of it! We’re destroying words–scores of them, hundreds of them, every day. We’re cutting the language down to the bone.”

He goes on in more detail:

“It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words. Of course the great advantage is in the verbs and adjectives, but there are hundreds of nouns that can be got rid of as well. It isn’t only the synonyms; there are also the antonyms. After all, what justification is there for a word which is simply the opposite of some other words? A word contains its opposite in itself. Take ‘good,’ for instance. If you have a word like ‘good,’ what need is there for a word like ‘bad’? ‘Ungood’ will do just as well–better, because it’s an exact opposite, which the other is not. Or again, if you want a stronger version of ‘good,’ what sense is there in having a whole string of vague useless words like ‘excellent’ and ‘splendid’ and all the rest of them? ‘Plusgood’ covers the meaning, or ‘doubleplusgood’ if you want something stronger still. Of course we use those forms already, but in the final version of Newspeak there’ll be nothing else. In the end the whole notion of goodness and badness will be covered by only six words–in reality, only one word. Don’t you see the beauty of that, Winston?…”

His disdain for the complexities of the Standard English language, “Oldspeak,” is evident:

“…In your heart you’d prefer to stick to Oldspeak, with all its vagueness and its useless shades of meaning…”

That sentence, with its description of shades of meaning as “useless” made an impression on me. I had to put the book down for a second to ponder on it…and I came to equate Standard English as we know it today (and really any language in the world that isn’t Newspeak-like), as being a language for human beings , for expressing all that encompasses the multi-faceted human condition; whereas Newspeak reduces the human down to an automaton machine, who’s primary goal in speaking is efficiency in its exactitude.

And then Syme reveals the true purpose of Newspeak, the reason for holding efficiency above all else:

“Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime* literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed will be expressed by exactly  one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten…”

(*Thoughtcrime is unorthodox thinking, all of which is against the law in Oceania.)

“To narrow the range of thought.” Although we usually think of the spoken or written word when we think of language, isn’t the purpose of language  truly  to create ideas and order our thoughts? The expression of an idea from one person to another is actually secondary, because the idea must be developed first before it can be expressed. Innovations, creative visions, worldviews…are all developed in our  minds . And although we do receive most of our thoughts and ideas from the world outside of us initially, all of those ideas were originally hatched inside of someone else’s mind. And once their ideas enter your mind, you can, in turn, turn them around and around and make them into something new by synthesizing all the concepts you hold in your head, which are only there because of the language that you know. This is why limiting words actually would result in a narrowing of thought.

Syme then goes on to paint a frightening future:

“By 2050–earlier, probably–all real knowledge of Oldspeak will have disappeared. The whole literature of the past will have been destroyed. Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton, Byron–they’ll exist only in Newspeak versions, not merely changed into something different, but actually changed into something contradictory of what they used to be…The whole climate of thought will be different. In fact there will  be no thought, as we understand it now. Orthodoxy means not thinking–not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.”

“There will  be no thought.” …Terrifying.

So think now to all those times you’ve heard friends and relatives lament the fact that English has too many synonyms. Although they are almost always not synonyms in the true sense, but rather elegant inventions to express slight differences in nuance, many people are frustrated when reading works with “fancy” words that they need to look up; and they seem to think the author only uses them to “show off.” Of course that may be the case in some instances, but more often than not the author is making a conscience choice to use one word over another in order to truly express their thoughts more exactly. I understand that this frustration with words does not come from a place of wanting to turn our world into a totalitarian state…but this frustration is the epitome of lacking understanding of the importance of words and language, nuance and shades of meaning.

Word are important. Incredibly important. And to these frustrated people…I must insist: elevate yourself. Rather than wishing language was brought down, bring yourself up. Learn new words. Deliberately use them in your speech so that you may learn them well. And as you learn, you’ll find yourself feeling less frustrated and more empowered. At least, that’s how I feel as I do this myself. I know that I have so much to continue to learn, but as I do I feel more and more empowered in my thinking. Perhaps this way, one individual at a time, we’ll maintain an educated citizenry of the free world, and we’ll protect the very tool that protects our civil liberties: our free thought.

Guide to the classics: Orwell’s 1984 and how it helps us understand tyrannical power today

Professor, School of Culture and Communication, The University of Melbourne

Disclosure statement

Robert Hassan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

University of Melbourne provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation AU.

View all partners

It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen. Winston Smith, his chin nuzzled into his breast in an effort to escape the vile wind, slipped quickly through the glass doors of Victory Mansions, though not quickly enough to prevent a swirl of gritty dust from entering along with him.

As novel-openers go, they don’t come much better than this one in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four . See how the unexpected “striking thirteen” runs powerfully into the beginnings of characterisation and world-building in just two arresting sentences.

Orwell knew that words could both grip the attention and change the mind. He wrote the book as the Cold War was becoming entrenched, and it was meant as an explicit warning on the nature of state power at that time.

The book still sells by the thousands, and is read by students who are compelled to do so. But it can be read voluntarily and profitably, and it can tell us a lot about contemporary politics and power, from Donald Trump to Facebook.

A world of ‘doublespeak’

Nineteen Eighty-Four became an instant classic when published in 1949. People could see in it a world that could easily become a reality. The memory of Nazi dictatorship was still fresh, the Soviet Union had erected the Iron Curtain, and the USA had the atomic bomb.

The novel’s setting is a dystopian Britain, which has become a part of Oceania, a region in perpetual war with the other super-regions of Eurasia and Eastasia. Oppression, surveillance and control are facts of life in a society ruled by the Party and its four Ministries of Truth, Peace, Plenty and Love.

It is a world of “doublespeak” where things are the opposite of what they appear; there is no truth, only lies – only war and only privation.

Read more: What does 'Orwellian' mean, anyway?

One of Orwell’s innovations is to introduce us to a new political lexicon, a “Newspeak” where he shows how words can be used and abused as a form of power. Words like “Thoughtcrime”, where it is illegal to have thoughts that are in opposition to the Party; or “unperson”, meaning someone who has been executed by the Party (e.g. for Thoughtcrime) will have all record of his or her existence erased.

Not only do we use many of these words today, but the manipulative function that Orwell described is still intact. For example, when Kellyanne Conway, advisor to US president Donald Trump, stated in 2017 that the Administration has its own “alternative facts”, she was indulging in “doublethink”: an attempted psychological control of reality through words.

Nineteen Eighty-Four became an Amazon bestseller following the election of Trump and the airing of this interview.

Within the corridors of Orwell’s Ministry of Truth, though, there’s a tiny flickering of real love that develops between protagonist Winston and co-worker Julia. They share unlawful thoughts about other possible ways of living and thinking, based upon vague and unreliable memories of a time before world wars and Big Brother and the Party.

But through its immense powers of surveillance and the efforts of the Thought Police, Big Brother knows everything, and soon the lovers are suspects. Winston is arrested and brought before O’Brien, the novel’s antagonist and a Party heavyweight who is openly cynical about the power structure of society. For him power is a zero-sum equation: if you don’t use it to keep others down, they will use it similarly against you.

There is much drama, suspense and even horror in Orwell’s book. He wrote about what he saw around him, but filtered it with an acute sensitivity to the innate fragility of civilisation. In 1943, when the plot-lines of Nineteen Eighty-Four were probably gestating in his head, Orwell wrote :

Either power politics must yield to common decency, or the world must go spiralling down into a nightmare into which we can already catch some dim glimpses.

1984 goes digital

These days, a lot of power politics circulates online. Orwell, who worked for the BBC during the war, was sensitive to the power of communications. What he calls the “telescreen” is essentially a surveillance device that “received and transmitted simultaneously”.

He writes of the device that “any sound that Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it; moreover […] he could be seen as well as heard”. Remind you of anything? Alexa or Siri and their ilk may be fads, but the technology now exists; and so then does a new kind of power.

Such power is contingent and shifting and does not always reside with governments.

Donald Trump wields a new digital power through Twitter and Facebook and can “speak to his base” whenever he’s angry, bored or overcome by impulse. But through ownership of new digital technologies, new actors – data corporations – have acquired old powers. These are the powers to manipulate, surveil, and influence millions of people through access to their data.

And their power in turn can be leeched by hackers, state-sponsored or independent. The complexity of political power today means we need to be more attuned to its changing forms, to more effectively strategise and resist.

Orwell’s “common decency” reference may now sound rather quaint. But its very absence in social media is a problem.

The algorithms that Twitter, Facebook and Google insert into our communications act essentially as “manipulation engines” that can cause division, favour extreme views, and set groups of people against each other.

Divide-and-rule is not their intention – getting you online in order to sell your data to advertisers is – but that is the effect, and democratic politics is the worse for it.

Read more: How political engagement on social media can drive people to extremes

Understanding the nature of political power is even more important today than when Orwell wrote. Oppression and manipulation were “simpler” and more brutal then; today, social control and its sources are more opaque.

Orwell’s imperishable value as a writer is that he provides a template on the character of political power that tells us that we cannot be complacent, cannot leave it to government to fix, and cannot leave it to fate and hope for the best.

Things did not turn out so well for Winston Smith. Pushed to the limit by torture and brainwashing, he betrays Julia. And in his abject state he convinces himself, finally, of the rightness of the Party: “He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.”

The story ends there. But for Orwell the writer and activist, the struggle for Truth, Peace, Plenty and Love was only beginning.

Today, Nineteen Eighty-Four comes across not as a warning that the actual world of Winston and Julia and O'Brien is in danger of becoming reality. Rather, its true value is that it teaches us that power and tyranny are made possible through the use of words and how they are mediated.

If we understand power in this way, especially in our digital world, then unlike Winston, we will have a better chance to fight it.

• George Orwell
• 1984 (novel)
• Donald Trump
• Guide to the Classics
• Nineteen Eighty-Four
• Personal data

Head of Evidence to Action

Supply Chain - Assistant/Associate Professor (Tenure-Track)

Education Research Fellow

OzGrav Postdoctoral Research Fellow

Casual Facilitator: GERRIC Student Programs - Arts, Design and Architecture

The Definitive Guide to Analysing ‘1984’ for English: Summary, Context, Themes & Characters

Newspeak? Doublethink? What do all of these words mean? If you need help analysing 1984 by George Orwell, you’ve come to the right place — we’ve got all you need to know with a summary, list of key characters, themes and a 3-step essay analysis guide!

We’ve even got an analysis table and a sample paragraph that’s all free for you to download on 1984.

So, let’s throw back into 1984 (the fictional one of course)! 

1984 by George Orwell Summary & Key Messages Key Characters in 1984 Context Themes Explored in 1984 Essay Analysis of 1984

1984 by George Orwell Summary & Key Messages

The politics of oceania.

1984 belongs in the dystopian, science fiction genre as it explores the dangers of corrupted power under a totalitarian regime. Totalitarianism is a government system that dictates how its citizens think, behave and act by constantly keeping an eye on them and carrying out punishments for those who don’t obey. Sounds strict, hey? 

Sadly, this is the life of our protagonist, Winston Smith. Winston lives in a nation that resembles London in Oceania, which has been in a war with Eurasia and Eastasia since forever but no one really knows what the war is about. This is because the Party controls its people through rewriting history in the Ministry of Truth, where Winston edits historical records as part of his job.

The Party also invented a new language called “Newspeak” , which eliminates any words associated with rebellion to ensure full subservience of their nation. 

Wherever Winston goes, he is bombarded with posters of their omnipresent leader, Big Brother. There are also hidden cameras and microphones that are implanted everywhere by the thought police to monitor every move of its citizens.

It’s a scary place because if you do or say anything wrong, the thought police will capture you and force you into lifelong labour . In this world, people cannot have close friends, cannot date whoever they want and cannot have intimate relationships.

Instead, the people pent up these emotions and channel them into aggressive patriotism for their government which are expressed in two minute hate rallies. 

The Start of Winston’s Rebellion

Winston has had enough of the Party and its strict control. He purchases an illegal diary to commit crimethink, where he expresses his own thoughts and feelings about the Party through writing. He also writes about his interest in O’Brien, a member of the Inner Party who he believes could be part of the underground rebellion group called the Brotherhood. 

Access 1984 Downloadable Sample Paragraph and Examples of Analysis

Winston’s and Julia’s Relationship

At work, Winston realises that his historical records were not aligning with his memories . He notices Julia, a young beautiful girl staring at him, and he is afraid that she will turn him into the “thought police”.

However, Julia passes him a note that says “I love you” and they start an affair. 

O’Brien’s Betrayal 

As their relationship grows more seriously, so does Winston’s hatred for the Party. He and Julia decided to reveal their rebellion to O’Brien, who also appeared to be on their side .

O’Brien welcomes them into the Brotherhood and passed Winston a copy of Emmanuel Goldstein’s book. As Winston starts reading the book, the thought police charge in, arrest Winston and Julia and bring them to the Ministry of Love. Turns out, O’Brien is a snake. 

The Party Tortures Winston

At the Ministry of Love, Winston is tortured mercilessly and this makes him confess everything he knows about Julia and the rebellion .

It is then revealed that the government carries out these acts to exercise total power and control over the people of Oceania, to the extent where people not only do things out of fear, but genuinely believe in what they are doing even if it doesn’t make sense.

Winston’s Loss of Individuality

In Room 101, Winston experiences a true Fear Factor episode. The thought police threaten Winston with his ultimate fear, rats that would eat his face off. This caused Winston to scream “Do it to Julia, not me!”, which represents his betrayal to the only person that held value to him.

After this, the thought police let both Winston and Julia go, but the two ex-lovers can no longer look at each other face to face as they are both broken inside. Winston becomes a changed man who does not want to think about rebelling and instead becomes highly supportive of the Party and Big Brother. 

Key Characters in 1984

Winston Smith  The main protagonist who works under the Ministry of Truth in London, Oceania. His appearance is frail, pensive and intelligent. He hates the Party and its totalitarian system with a desire to revolutionise his current political situation. He can be emotional and idealistic with his goals. 

Julia  A beautiful young girl who is Winston’s love interest. Julia is sex-positive with an optimistic attitude about the future of the Party. She represents parts of humanity that Winston lacks, such as passive survival, intimacy, intuition and pragmatism. 

O’Brien  A mysterious leader of the Inner Party who Winston trusts as Winston believes that O’Brien is a member of the legendary rebellion group, the Brotherhood. It is revealed later in the novel that O’Brien is a leader of The Party who has been keeping a close eye on Winston. His betrayal launches us into the inner mechanisms of The Party and its totalitarian rule. O’Brien’s character parallels that of famous dictators in modern history such as Stalin and Hitler, as he is determined to indoctrinate Winston in the name of “purity.” 

Big Brother  Have you watched the show Big Brother? His character in the show is almost the same as in 1984, except a lot more controlling. In 1984, Big Brother is the most dominating figure in Oceania as he is perceived to be the ruler, although Orwell does not specify whether he really exists or not. Big Brother’s face is plastered among posters, coins and telescreens with the slogan “BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU” so it’s impossible to avoid him anywhere. 

Emmanuel Goldstein As the leader of the legendary group of rebels called the Brotherhood, Emmanuel Goldstein is the opposing figure of Big Brother. Although he never appears in the novel, he has had a profound impact on Winston’s hope for the future. He is the most dangerous man in Oceania, according to the Party.  

Context in 1984

To understand 1984’s context, we must first understand the author’s personal background to craft a well thought-out essay analysis. This is because the author’s personal and historical experiences do shape the novel and its themes. So, let’s start with Orwell’s schooling days.

If you ever felt suppressed at school, Orwell can definitely relate with you on that. As a “lower-upper-middle class”, Orwell didn’t fit in with his peers and was upset with the restricted routine that schools impose on their students.

He then went on to become a British Imperial Policeman in Burma where he hated his job as he had to execute strict laws under a political system he didn’t like. After this, he moved to England and became a full-time writer. 

Orwell experienced poverty for awhile, and even lived as a coal miner in northern England which caused him to shift from capitalist ideals to democratic socialism. Here are the simplified definitions of the political concepts that influenced Orwell’s beliefs and 1984’s themes: 

• Capitalism: An economic system where property is owned and controlled by private actors, rather than by state. As such individuals can control how much they set their prices, instead of leaving it to the government to dictate. 
• Democratic Socialism: Unlike capitalism, democratic socialism is an economic system whereby property and products are owned and controlled by the entire society, alongside governments. So, the main difference here is that governments have a say in trade whereas in capitalism, governments do not interfere with private owner’s business. 

Orwell was also concerned with the rise of Thatcherism. 

In the year 1936, Orwell fought as a socialist in the Spanish Civil War during World War II, where he became familiar with totalitarian systems that are under leaders such as Hitler and Stalin. Although Orwell was passionate about socialism at first, he soon became disillusioned and disappointed with its ideals as Stalin used communism as the foundation of his authoritarian system. 

Stalin of the Soviet Union was also an important influence in shaping 1984’s totalitarian regime of Oceania, as Stalin used secret police to force confessions out of enemies through torture alike how the Ministry of Love did with Winston . Like the Party, the Soviet Union also tampered with physical records of people as they imprison and/or eliminate millions of lives. 

With the rise of the nuclear age and television in 1949, Orwell envisioned a future where everyone would always be monitored through screens in a post-atomic dictatorship . This became a fear that was highly possible when speculated thirty five years into the future. 

But as we all know, this did not become true. In the early 1990s, the Cold War ended with the triumph of democracy, as signified by the fall of the Berlin Wall and the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

Even so, Orwell’s 1984 still serves as a precautionary tale against the corruption and abuse of totalitarian regimes, along with a profound insight into the use of language and history to manipulate one’s individuality.  

Want more information on George Orwell? Take a look at this biography found via the Orwell Foundation page!

Themes Explored in 1984

To help you get started on your thesis or topic sentence , here are three key themes from 1984 that you can write about in your essay analysis !

The Consequences of Totalitarianism

After experiencing the violence and corruption of totalitarian regimes in Spain and Russia, Orwell wrote 1984 as a warning about the dangers of an authoritarian regime where the government holds the most power. As such, the Party in 1984 administered extreme methods of physical and psychological manipulation to enforce total submission of its people. 

Physical control by the Party includes total surveillance of its people to the extent where even a twitch in the face can be enough to warrant an arrest. Morning exercises, called Physical Jerks, are also carried out before long hours at work to tire people out so they don’t have the energy to think beyond the Party’s propaganda. 

The Party also uses physical torture to “re-educate” and punish those who rebel against them. It is this physical pain that causes Winston to lose his own individuality and moral beliefs, allowing the Party to infiltrate his mind and dictate his sense of reality. 

Meanwhile, the Party also uses psychological tactics to saturate the individual’s mind with propaganda and disable its ability for independent thinking. On top of watching everyone everywhere, the telescreens are also used to indoctrinate (ie. brainwash) people into supporting the Party despite its flaws.

The telescreens also perpetuate slogans such as “BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU” , to remind people that their government is always watching their back so they better behave according to the Party’s standards. 

The Party also deems close friendships and conversations with others illegal. So, if you’re itching to spill the tea, your only method of venting your emotions out is through pep rallies, where the Party encourages you to show extreme expressions of hatred to its political enemies. Ultimately, this allows the Party to dictate how and where you should express your emotions, keeping you from expressing your individual feelings, thoughts and opinions. 

Here are some quotes that illustrate the perils of totalitarianism: 

The Power of Language to Liberate and Control 

In 1984, language has the dual capacity to both restrain and facilitate individual expression. This is another key message that Orwell imparts, as he highlights how language can either promote or limit ideas which influence our beliefs, behaviour and identity. 

The Party uses Newspeak as a way of controlling the language that its people speak, which in turn dictates the people’s thoughts, actions and personalities (or lack thereof).

By eliminating words that are associated with rebellious thoughts, the Party essentially removes the people’s ability to think of resistance because there are no words to conceive it. With continual edits with Newspeak, the Party inches a step closer to their ultimate goal of total coercion from their people.

Yet, in Winston’s case, he uses language as a vehicle of self-expression as he purchases a diary for himself and writes his everyday thoughts, opinions and feelings into it . By writing in his own words, he is able to build himself an identity with his own passions, goals and perspective.

Sadly, in a world where the government overrules individual expression, Winston’s use of language dwindles, though it is encouraging to see how language can still work to preserve independent thought.

Here are three quotes that can help you get started on this theme: 

The Importance of Preserving Our Identity and Individualism

What happens if we lose everything that defines us as us? 

1984 truly delves into this scary concept as the Party removes everyone’s personal details so they are not able to establish their own identity. For example, even Winston does not know his own age, who his real parents are nor can he trust his own childhood memories as there are no photographs or evidences to help him differentiate between reality and imagination. 

Aside from Winston, the rest of Oceania are also denied documents that could give them a sense of individuality and help them differentiate themselves from others . This causes their memories to grow fuzzy, thus making the people of Oceania vulnerable and dependent on the stories that the Party tells them.

In turn, by controlling the present, the Party can re-engineer the past. Simultaneously, by controlling the past, the Party can rationalise its shortcomings and project a perfect government that is far from the truth. 

With no recollection of the past, the people of Oceania can no longer stay in touch with their real identities and instead, become identical as they wear the same uniform, drink the same brand of alcohol and more. Yet, Winston builds his own sense of identity through recording his thoughts, experiences and emotions in his diary. This act along with his relationship with Julia symbolises Winston’s declaration of his own independence and identity as a rebel who disagrees with the Party’s system. 

Despite this, Winston’s own sense of individuality and identity dissolves after his torturous experience at the Ministry of Love, which transforms him into another member of the Outer Party who blends into the crowd. By asserting a dark vision of humanity’s individualism, Orwell urges audiences in the present to truly value their freedom to express and preserve their identity. 

Here are some quotes that are related to this idea which you may find helpful:

Of course, 1984 also includes other themes that you may be thinking about writing analysis for, such as: 

• Rebellion and Patriotism 
• Active versus Passive Survival 
• The Corrupt Use of Technology

Check out our recommended related text for 1984 .

Essay Analysis: How to Analyse 1984 in 3 Steps

Analysing your text is always the first step to writing an amazing essay! Lots of students make the mistake of jumping right into writing without really understanding what the text is about.

This leads to arguments that only skim the surface of the complex ideas, techniques and elements of the text. So, let’s build a comprehensive thesis through an in-depth analysis of the 1984. 

Here are three easy steps that you can use to analyse 1984 and really impress your English teachers!

Step 1: Select your example(s)

1984 is a world of its own with its totalitarian systems, use of foreign words and more. So, we totally understand if you’re feeling lost and don’t know where to begin. 

Our piece of advice is to look for examples that come with a technique. Techniques offer you a chance to delve into the text’s underlying meaning, which would help you deepen your analysis and enrich your essay writing. 

Find our extensive list of quotes from 1984 by George Orwell!

Here are two quotes that relate to consequences of totalitarian power, which we have picked to help you visualise which examples can provide a deeper meaning: 

“Big Brother is Watching You.”  “WAR IS PEACE FREEDOM IS SLAVERY IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH” 

Step 2: Identify your technique(s)

Getting a good grade in English is more than listing out every technique that you can find in the text. Instead, it’s about finding techniques that allow you to dive deeper into the themes you’re focussing on, while also supporting your argument. 

Try to look for techniques that allow you to explain its effects and link to your argument such as symbols, metaphors, connotations, similes and historical allegories . In Orwell’s case, he uses a lot of language techniques such as neologism, where he makes up his own words such as “Doublethink” or “Newspeak”. 

For the two quotes above, its three techniques include historical allusion, rhetoric and oxymoron. 

If possible, you can look out for a quote that encompasses a few techniques to really pack a punch in your analysis. 

Step 3: Write the analysis

Once you’re done collecting your examples and techniques, the next part is writing. You must remember to explain what the effect of the technique is and how it supports your argument. Otherwise, it’s not going to be a cohesive essay if you’re just listing out techniques. 

An example of listing out techniques looks like this: 

“The rhetoric “Big Brother is Watching You” is also a historical allusion while “War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery and Ignorance is Strength” is oxymoronic.”

Instead, you must elaborate on how each of these techniques link to your argument. 

“Big Brother is Watching You” is a rhetoric imposed by the Party to instil psychological fear and submission of the people of Oceania, whereby Orwell uses to warn the dangers of totalitarianism. “Big Brother” is also a historical allusion to Hitler to remind the audience that 1984 is not entirely fictional but a possible future of our reality, urging us to take action against totalitarian regimes with the autonomy we have now. 

Meanwhile, the slogan ““WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH” represents the oxymoronic mentalities that have been indoctrinated into the people of Oceania, highlighting how totalitarian regimes would force its people to think whatever they want their people to think, no matter how illogical it is. 

Together, your analysis should look something like: 

The Party perpetuates the rhetoric, “Big Brother is Watching You” to instil psychological fear and coercion of the the people of Oceania, which forewarns a lack of individual freedom and private reflection within authoritarian regimes. As “Big Brother” is a historical allusion to Hitler, Orwell reminds the audience that 1984 and its extremist politics is a reality, urging us to defend our independence before it’s forbidden. Furthermore, the slogan “War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength” embodies the oxymoronic mentalities that the Party indoctrinates into its people, revealing the extreme extent of psychological control an authoritarian regime strives to ensure their power is never questioned, no matter how irrational it is.

Need some help with your essay analysis of other texts aside from 1984?

Check out other texts we’ve created guides for below:

• Romeo and Juliet
• Run Lola Run
• The Meursault Investigation
• In Cold Blood
• To Kill a Mockingbird
• The Book Thief
• The Tempest
• Blade Runner
• Things Fall Apart
• Mrs Dalloway

Are you looking for some extra help with your essay analysis of 1984?

We have an incredible team of tutors and mentors.

We can help you master your essay analysis of 1984 by taking you through the summary, context, key characters and themes. We’ll also help you ace your upcoming English assessments with personalised lessons conducted one-on-one in your home or online!

We’ve supported over  8,000 students over the last 11 years , and on average our students score mark improvements of over 20%!

To find out more and get started with an inspirational tutor and mentor,   get in touch today  or give us a ring on  1300 267 888!

Kate Lynn Law  graduated in 2017 with an all rounders HSC award and an ATAR of 97.65. Passionate about mentoring, she enjoys working with high school students to improve their academic, work and life skills in preparation for the HSC and what comes next. An avid blogger, Kate had administered a creative writing page for over 2000 people since 2013, writing to an international audience since her early teenage years.

• Topics: ✏️ English , ✍️ Learn

Related Articles

Everything you need to know about analysing ‘jasper jones’ for english – summary, context, themes & characters, a comprehensive guide to analysing ‘the book thief’: summary, context, themes & characters, the definitive guide to analysing ‘in cold blood’: summary, context & themes, 45,861 students have a head start....

Get exclusive study content & advice from our team of experts delivered weekly to your inbox!

Looking for English Support?

Discover how we can help you!

We provide services in

Home — Essay Samples — Literature — 1984 — The Influence of Emotion in 1984

The Relationship Between Power and Emotions in 1984

• Categories: 1984 George Orwell

About this sample

Words: 3092 |

16 min read

Published: Jun 29, 2018

Words: 3092 | Pages: 7 | 16 min read

Table of contents

Introduction, power through destroying emotions in 1984.

• Stephens, P. H. (2004). Nature and human liberty: The Golden Country in George Orwell’s 1984 and an alternative conception of human freedom. Organization & environment, 17(1), 76-98. (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1086026603262032)
• Al-Subaihi, M. N., & Ismail, H. H. (2020). Orwell’S 1984 and the concept of Powerlessness. International Journal of English, Literature and Social Sciences, 5, 289-297. (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339510254_Orwell'S_1984_and_the_concept_of_Powerlessness)
• Padden, M. (2014). Big Brother is Watching You: Panoptic Control in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. (https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A793548&dswid=-5370)
• Dunđer, I., & Pavlovski, M. (2019, May). Behind the dystopian sentiment: a sentiment analysis of George Orwell’s 1984. In 2019 42nd International Convention on Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO) (pp. 577-582). IEEE. (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8757084)
• Qin, X. (2018). Ethical Consciousness under Totalitarianism-Review on George Orwell's 1984. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 9(4), 731-737. (http://www.academypublication.com/issues2/jltr/vol09/04/08.pdf)

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Heisenberg

Verified writer

• Expert in: Life Literature

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

3 pages / 1411 words

2 pages / 778 words

1 pages / 564 words

2 pages / 959 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on 1984

George Orwell’s novel Nineteen Eighty-Four depicts a dystopian society, in which civilians are constantly being monitored through day-to-day life. With issues such as criminalization of free thought and the use of technology, in [...]

Set in a future society where the government, known as the Party, exercises complete control over every aspect of its citizens' lives, 1984 paints a bleak picture of a world where individuality is a threat to the ruling regime. [...]

Novel 1984 is a dystopian masterpiece that explores the dangers of totalitarianism and the impact of censorship on society. Set in a future world where the government controls every aspect of people's lives, the novel serves as [...]

In George Orwell's dystopian novel "1984," Tom Parsons is a character whose portrayal offers unique insights into the oppressive society of Oceania. Parsons represents the embodiment of the Party's indoctrination and the [...]

Thoughtcrime in 1984: The Battle for Freedom of ThoughtImagine living in a world where your thoughts are constantly monitored and controlled by a totalitarian regime. In George Orwell's dystopian novel, 1984, this horrifying [...]

George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four investigates the connection among Winston and Julia. Orwell does this by sincerely illuminating the gathering of people of Winston's everyday existence of affection, torment, hurt and [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

• Ask LitCharts AI
• Discussion Question Generator
• Essay Prompt Generator
• Quiz Question Generator

• Literature Guides
• Poetry Guides
• Shakespeare Translations
• Literary Terms

George Orwell

Ask LitCharts AI: The answer to your questions

Welcome to the LitCharts study guide on George Orwell's 1984 . Created by the original team behind SparkNotes, LitCharts are the world's best literature guides.

1984: Introduction

1984: plot summary, 1984: detailed summary & analysis, 1984: themes, 1984: quotes, 1984: characters, 1984: symbols, 1984: literary devices, 1984: theme wheel, brief biography of george orwell.

Historical Context of 1984

Other books related to 1984.

• Full Title: Nineteen Eighty-Four: A Novel
• When Written: 1945-49; outline written 1943
• Where Written: Jura, Scotland
• When Published: June 1949
• Literary Period: Late Modernism
• Genre: Novel / Satire / Parable
• Setting: London in the year 1984
• Climax: Winston is tortured in Room 101
• Antagonist: O'Brien
• Point of View: Third-Person Limited

Extra Credit for 1984

Outspoken Anti-Communist. Orwell didn't just write literature that condemned the Communist state of the USSR. He did everything he could, from writing editorials to compiling lists of men he knew were Soviet spies, to combat the willful blindness of many intellectuals in the West to USSR atrocities.

Working Title. Orwell's working title for the novel was The Last Man in Europe .

• Quizzes, saving guides, requests, plus so much more.

• Science & Math
• Sociology & Philosophy
• Law & Politics

Power, Control and Loss of Individuality in George Orwell’s 1984

• Power, Control and Loss of…

Texts which offer new insights into the anomalies and inconsistencies in human behaviour and motivations. Indeed, through this examination, the audience may glean an insight into the author’s manipulation of such human behaviour and motivation, prompting the audience to be made aware of their behaviour. 

Through an exploration of Orwell’s dystopian novel, 1984, the dangers of living in an autocratic totalitarian society allows readers to become conscious of the anomalies and inconsistencies that can arise within an individual, which in 1984 can be seen through the main protagonist, Winston Smith.

Loss of individuality, power and control, and inconsistencies such as “two plus two equals four” can be seen throughout the novel. Through the following ideas, we are able to see how Orwell offers new insight into the anomalies and inconsistencies that arise in human behavior due to political manipulation.

Loss of individuality is seen as one of the major themes in 1984 and can be seen through the main protagonist, Winston. In order for the party, an autocratic totalitarian society, to stay in power, its citizens must deny their individuality and eradicate their independent thought.

Although, this is something which Winston deviates from a try to maintain his individuality against the collective identity the party wishes him to uptake, turning him into an anomaly. Winston unlike others goes against the party, where he keeps a private diary, engages in an intimate relationship, and insists that the reality which the party wants its citizens to believe in is not true.

Even though Winston tries to deviate himself from losing his individuality, in the end, he becomes a collective like the other citizens of Oceania due to the party’s constant manipulation of history and destruction of past historical records making it near impossible for one to establish an identity.

The citizens of Oceania speak in the official language of Newspeak, which is a Neologism in 1984, demonstrating the limited range of thoughts that can be expressed by an individual. Orwell throughout 1984, constantly uses zoomorphism, such as “Duckspeak” in which he compares the individuals of Oceania to animals demonstrating how society has become dehumanized from the loss of thought. This shows how the Party’s oppression of individual thought has prevented its citizens from attaining an individual identity.

Hence, through the following idea of loss of individuality, we as an audience are able to see how the oppression of individualism within a totalitarian society offers new insight into the anomaly of human behaviour.

Power and control are seen as the utmost goal the party seeks to achieve and can be seen through the various methods the party has put in place in order to keep its citizens under control. Propaganda is one of the few methods which the party uses to control the public.

By using Big Brother as their major propaganda whose “ eyes seem to follow you about when you move” allows the party to manipulate the public and make Goldstein a public enemy. This allows the party to gain power as it causes all of Oceania to be turned against one man and distract them from the party’s actions as well as becoming patriot, hence making it easier for the party to manipulate its citizens.

The telescreens are another method which the party undertakes as through the telescreens the party is able to gain complete control over each individual in Oceania as it can “be dimmed but not turned off” . As previously mentioned, the party not only forces its citizens of Oceania to strip themselves from their identity but are also prevented from speaking English and instead must speak in the official language of Oceania known as ‘Newspeak’ which is created to fulfill the demands of INGSOC (‘English socialism).

This prevents the people of Oceania from conceptualizing anything that may be against the party or question the party’s power and ruling. Through this, we are able to see how the party is able to also have control over language and the minds of its citizens. As mentioned by O’Brien, “The party seeks power for its own sake, we are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power”.

Through this quote, we are able to see how power is collective and can only be attained by an individual if he prevents himself from becoming one. Thus, through the following theme of power and control, we are able to see the complexity of human motivation and behavior.

Through the party having complete control over the truth, we are given an insight into the inconsistencies of Oceania. One of the major inconsistencies which can be seen within the novel is the “two plus two equals five” slogan which shows an inconsistency in belief with the truth. Within the following paradoxical slogan of ignorance is strength, Orwell portrays how the people of Oceania are expected to bury the truth and accept irrationality.

The slogan “ignorance is strength” is also the willing ignorance of the people who ignore the contradictions and fail to investigate such inconsistencies as a non-existent war with an ever-changing enemy (Frank, 2020). With the party having complete control over history, they are able to manipulate the past, present, and the future, leading its people of Oceania to believe in a false reality that has been created by the party.

Overall, through an explanation of the following ideas of loss of individuality, power and control and inconsistencies such as “two plus two equals five”, we are able to see how Orwell offered an insight into the inconsistencies in human behavior causing the audience to understand and reflect upon the impact a totalitarian society can have on one’s behavior and motivation.

Related Posts

• George Orwell: Biography, Works, Critics
• Betrayal in George Orwell’s 1984
• George Orwell “Shooting An Elephant”: Metaphors and Analysis
• Government Oppression in George Orwell’s 1984
• George Orwell's 1984: Summary & Conflict

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Post comment

Common Module State-Rank Essay Showcase: Nineteen Eighty-Four

The following essay was written by Project Academy English Tutor, Marko Beocanin

Marko Beocanin

99.95 ATAR & 3 x State Ranker

The following essay was written by Project Academy English Teacher, Marko Beocanin.

Marko’s Achievements:

• 8th in NSW for English Advanced (98/100)
• Rank 1 in English Advanced, Extension 1 and Extension 2
• School Captain of Normanhurst Boys High School

Marko kindly agreed to share his essay and thorough annotations to help demystify for HSC students what comprises an upper Band 6 response!

Common Module: Nineteen Eighty-Four Essay Question

Marko’s following essay was written in response to the question:

“The representation of human experiences makes us more aware of the intricate nature of humanity.” In your response, discuss this statement with detailed reference to George Orwell’s ‘Nineteen Eighty-Four’.

State-Ranking Common Module Essay Response

George Orwell’s 1949 Swiftian satire Nineteen Eighty-Four invites us to appreciate the intricate nature of humanity by representing how the abuse of power by totalitarian governments degrades our individual and collective experiences. (Link to rubric through individual/collective experiences, and a clear cause and effect argument: totalitarian governance -> degraded human experience. Also, comments on the genre of Swiftian satire. Value!) Orwell explores how oppressive authorities suppress the intricate societal pillars of culture, expression and freedom to maintain power. He then reveals how this suppression brutalises individual human behaviour and motivations because it undermines emotion and intricate thought. (Link to rubric through ‘human behaviour and motivations’, and extended cause and effect in which the first paragraph explores the collective ‘cause’ and the second paragraph explores the individual ‘effect’. This is an easy way to structure your arguments whilst continuously engaging with the rubric!) Ultimately, he argues that we must resist the political apathy that enables oppressive governments to maintain power and crush human intricacy. Therefore, his representation of human experiences not only challenges us to consider the intricate nature of humanity, but exhorts us to greater political vigilance so we can preserve it. (Concluding sentence that broadens the scope of the question and reaffirms the purpose of the text).

Orwell makes us aware of the intricate nature of humanity by representing how totalitarian authorities suppress intricate collective experiences of culture, expression and freedom in order to assert control. (This is the ‘collective’ paragraph – a cause and effect argument that relates the question to the loss of human intricacy in the collective as a result of totalitarian rule). His bleak vision was informed by Stalin’s USSR: a regime built upon the fabrication of history in Stalin’s ‘cult of personality’, and ruthlessly enforced by the NKVD. (Specific context – an actual specific regime is named and some details about its enforcement are given). The symbolic colourlessness and propaganda-poster motif he uses to describe London reflects the loss of human intricacy and culture under such leadership: “there seemed to be no colour in anything, except the posters that were plastered everywhere.” (First example sets up the world of the text, and the degraded collective experience). Orwell uses the telescreens, dramatically capitalised “BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU” posters and allusions to Stalin in Big Brother’s “black-moustachio’d face” as metonyms for how governmental surveillance dominates both physical and cultural collective experiences. Winston’s metatextual construction of the fictitious “Comrade Ogilvy” serves as a symbol for the vast, worthless masses of information produced by totalitarian governments to undermine the intricacy of real human history: “Comrade Ogilvy, who had never existed…would exist just as authentically, and upon the same evidence, as Charlemagne or Julius Caesar.” Similarly, Orwell’s satirical representation of Newspeak ignites the idea that political slovenliness causes self-expression to degrade, which in turn destroys our capacity for intricate thought and resistance: “we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.” (The examples above prove that the government’s leadership style truly is totalitarian, and that it results in a loss of intricacy and ‘humanity’ in the collective. It’s good to cover a variety of examples that explore different facets of the collective – for example, the first example establishes the extreme surveillance, the second example establishes the loss of ‘truth’/history, and the third example establishes the loss of language). The political bitterness that marks Nineteen Eighty-Four as a Swiftian satire (This is a link to the ‘Swiftian’ term used in the thesis statement. It’s important to refer back to any descriptive terms you use in your thesis) ultimately culminates in O’Brien’s monologue, where Orwell juxtaposes the politicised verb “abolish” to symbols of human intricacy, “we shall abolish the orgasm…there will be no art, no literature, no science…when we are omnipotent”, to express how totalitarian rulers suppress collective experiences to gain metaphoric omnipotence. Thus, Orwell makes us aware of the intricate nature of humanity by representing a future in which totalitarian governments suppress it. (A linking sentence that ties it all back to the question and rephrases the point)

Orwell then argues that the effect of this suppression is a loss of human intricacy that brutalises society and devalues individual experiences. (Cause and effect argument that links collective suppression to a loss of human intricacy on an individual scale – continuous engagement with the question and the rubric!) Orwell’s exposure to the widespread hysteria of Hitler’s Nazi regime, caused by the Nuremberg Rallies and Joseph Goebbels’ virulent anti-semitic propaganda, informs his representation of Oceania’s dehumanised masses. (More specific context around the Nazis, and a specific link to how it informed his work) The burlesque Two Minute Hate reveals human inconsistency by representing how even introspective, intelligent characters can be stripped of their intricacy and compassion by the experience of collective hysteria: even Winston wishes to “flog [Julia] to death with a rubber truncheon…ravish her and cut her throat at the moment of climax”, and is only restored by compliance to the Christ-like totalitarian authority, “My-Saviour!”, Big Brother. (A link to the rubric with the ‘human inconsistency’ point) Orwell frequently juxtaposes dehumanising representations of the proles, “the proles are not human beings”, to political sloganism: “As the Party slogan put it: ‘Proles and animals are free’”, to argue that in such a collectively suppressed society, the upper class grow insensitive towards the intricate nature of those less privileged. (It’s important to link the proles into your argument – they’re often forgotten, but they’re a big part of the text!) He asserts that this loss of empathy degrades the authenticity and intricacy of human relationships, characterised by Winson’s paradoxically hyperbolic repulsion towards his wife: “[Katharine] had without exception the most stupid, vulgar, empty mind that he had every encountered”. (Continuous engagement with the question and rubric: make sure to recycle rubric terms – here, done with ‘paradoxically’ – and question terms – here, with ‘intricacy’)  Winston’s “betrayal” of Julia symbolises how totalitarianism ultimately brutalises individuals by replacing their compassion for intricate ideals such as love with selfish pragmatism: “Do it to Julia…Tear her face off, strip her to the bones. Not me!” Therefore, Orwell makes us more aware of the intricate nature of humanity by demonstrating how it can be robbed by suppressive governments and collective hysteria. (A linking sentence that sums up the paragraph).

By making us aware of how totalitarian governments suppress meaningful human experiences both individually and collectively, Orwell challenges us to resist so we can preserve our intricate nature. (This third paragraph discusses Orwell’s purpose as a composer. This can in general be a helpful way to structure paragraphs: Collective, Individual, Purpose) Orwell’s service in the 1930s Spanish Civil War as part of the Republican militia fighting against fascist-supported rebels positions him to satirise the political apathy of his audience. (Integration of personal context is useful here to justify Orwell’s motivations. It’s also a lot fresher than just including another totalitarian regime Orwell was exposed to) Orwell alludes to this through the metaphor of Winston’s diarising as an anomalous individual experience of resistance, ““[Winston] was a lonely ghost uttering a truth that nobody would ever hear,” which highlights how his intricate nature persists even in a suppressive society. Often, Orwell meta-fictively addresses his own context, as “a time when thought is free…when truth exists”, to establish an imperative to preserve our intricate human nature while we still can. The Julia romance trope (It’s good to include terms such as ‘trope’ which reflect your understanding of narrative structure and the overall form of the work.) represents how Winston’s gradual rejection of his political apathy empowered him to experience an authentic, intricately human relationship that subverts his totalitarian society: “the gesture with which [Julia] had thrown her clothes aside…[belonged] to an ancient time. Winston woke up with the word ‘Shakespeare’ on his lips.” Orwell juxtaposes Julia’s sexuality to Shakespeare, an immediately-recognisable metonym for culture and history, to argue that human intricacy can only be restored by actively resisting the dehumanising influence of the government. Orwell also represents Winston’s desensitised and immediate devotion to the Brotherhood to reflect how the preservation of human intricacy is a cause worth rebelling for, even by paradoxically unjust means: “[Winston was] prepared to commit murder…acts of sabotage which may cause the deaths of hundreds of innocent people…throw sulphuric acid in a child’s face.” (More chronological examples that show Winston’s transformation throughout the text. It’s useful to explore and contrast those who resist with those who don’t resist, and how just the act of resistance in some way restores our humanity! That’s why this paragraph comes after the ‘brutalised individual experience’ paragraph) However, Orwell ultimately asserts that it is too late for Winston to meaningfully restore humanity’s intricate nature, and concludes the text with his symbolic death and acceptance of the regime, “[Winston] had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.” (It’s important to remember that Orwell ends the text so miserably so that he can motivate his audiences not to do the same thing). The futility of this ending ignites the idea that we must not only be aware of our intricate nature, but must actively resist oppressive governments while we still can in order to preserve it. (A linking sentence that ties the paragraph together and justifies the futility of the ending)

Therefore, Orwell’s representation of human experiences in Nineteen Eighty-Four encourages us to reflect personally on our own intricate human nature, and challenges us to fight to preserve it. (Engages with the question (through the reflection point), and includes Orwell’s purpose as a composer). His depiction of a totalitarian government’s unchecked assertion of power on human culture and freedom, and the brutalising impact this has on individual and collective experiences, ultimately galvanises us to reject political apathy. (Your argument summaries can often be combined into a sentence or two in the conclusion now that the marker knows what you’re talking about. This reinforces the cause and effect structure as well.) Thus, the role of storytelling for Orwell is not only to make us more aware of our intricate nature, but to prove that we must actively resist oppressive governments while we still can in order to preserve it. (The clincher! It’s often useful to add “not only” in your final sentence to reinforce the massive scope of the text)

If reading this essay has helped you, you may also enjoy reading Marko’s ultimate guide to writing 20/20 HSC English essays .

P.S If you have any questions about aceing HSC English , you are welcome to learn from Marko and join one of Project Academy’s HSC English classes on a 3 week trial .

HSC Physics: How To Answer Short and Long Form Answer Questions

A comprehensive guide to short and long answer questions, with exemplars from Light: Quantum Model to Advanced Mechanics to Magnetic Fields.

Head of Physics, 99.80 ATAR

The Ultimate Guide on HSC Verbs

Navigating the HSC exams can be daunting, especially when it comes to understanding and responding to the nuances of the seemingly endless HSC verbs.

Alexandra Lawrence

English Department

Module B Exemplar Essay – King Henry IV, Part 1, William Shakespeare

Top 5 Tips for Acing HSC Biology

The Head of Biology, Alex's guide to acing HSC Biology

Alex Loustau

Head of Biology & 99.45 ATAR

Maximise Your Chances Of Coming First At School

Trial any Project Academy course for 3 weeks.

NSW's Top 1% Tutors

Unlimited Tutorials

NSW's Most Effective Courses

Access to Project's iPad

Access to Exclusive Resources

Access to Project's Study Space

by George Orwell

1984 essay questions.

Compare and contrast Julia and Winston. How does each rebel against the Party, and are these rebellions at all effective?

Trace Winston's path towards destruction. Where do we first see his fatalistic outlook? Is his defeat inevitable?

Discuss the role of technology in Oceania. In what areas is technology highly advanced, and in what areas has its progress stalled? Why?

Discuss the role of Big Brother in Oceania and in Winston's life. What role does Big Brother play in each?

Discuss contradiction in Oceania and the Party's governance, i.e. Ministry of Love, Ministry of Truth, Ministry of Plenty, Ministry of Peace. Why is such contradiction accepted so widely?

Discuss and analyze the role O'Brien plays in Winston's life. Why is he such a revered and respected character, even during Winston's time in the Ministry of Love?

Discuss the symbolic importance of the prole woman singing in the yard behind Mr. Charrington's apartment. What does she represent for Winston, and what does she represent for Julia?

1984 is a presentation of Orwell's definition of dystopia and was meant as a warning to those of the modern era. What specifically is Orwell warning us against, and how does he achieve this?

Analyze the interactions between Winston and the old man in the pub, Syme, and Mr. Charrington. How do Winston's interactions with these individuals guide him towards his ultimate arrest?

Analyze the Party's level of power over its citizens, specifically through the lens of psychological manipulation. Name the tools the Party uses to maintain this control and discuss their effectiveness.

Outline the social hierarchy of Oceania. How does this hierarchy support the Party and its goals?

1984 Questions and Answers

The Question and Answer section for 1984 is a great resource to ask questions, find answers, and discuss the novel.

Describe O’Briens apartment and lifestyle. How do they differ from Winston’s?

From the text:

It was only on very rare occasions that one saw inside the dwelling-places of the Inner Party, or even penetrated into the quarter of the town where they lived. The whole atmosphere of the huge block of flats, the richness and...

What was the result of Washington exam

Sorry, I'm not sure what you are asking here.

how is one put into the inner or outer party in the book 1984

The Outer Party is a huge government bureaucracy. They hold positions of trust but are largely responsible for keeping the totalitarian structure of Big Brother functional. The Outer Party numbers around 18 to 19 percent of the population and the...

Study Guide for 1984

1984 study guide contains a biography of George Orwell, literature essays, quiz questions, major themes, characters, and a full summary and analysis.

• 1984 Summary
• Character List

Essays for 1984

1984 essays are academic essays for citation. These papers were written primarily by students and provide critical analysis of 1984 by George Orwell.

• The Reflection of George Orwell
• Totalitarian Collectivism in 1984, or, Big Brother Loves You
• Sex as Rebellion
• Class Ties: The Dealings of Human Nature Depicted through Social Classes in 1984
• 1984: The Ultimate Parody of the Utopian World

Lesson Plan for 1984

• About the Author
• Study Objectives
• Common Core Standards
• Introduction to 1984
• Relationship to Other Books
• Bringing in Technology
• Notes to the Teacher
• Related Links
• 1984 Bibliography

Wikipedia Entries for 1984

• Introduction